task_move_stage

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds a meaningful behavioral trait beyond them: 'Требует подтверждения пользователя' (requires user confirmation). It doesn't detail permissions or side effects, but with annotations carrying the safety profile this is sufficient context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, sibling routing, and confirmation requirement. The most important differentiating information is front-loaded and there is no redundant text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple 2-parameter mutation with an output schema and helpful annotations, the description covers purpose, stage-ID sourcing, sibling routing, and confirmation. It could be slightly more explicit about how confirmation should be obtained or what happens if the stage belongs to another project, but these are minor gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already fully documents both parameters (id, stage_id) with descriptions. The description adds value by telling the agent where to find valid stage IDs ('ID стадий — в project_board') and clarifying that stage_id is the kanban stage, which goes beyond the raw schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Перенести задачу проекта на другую стадию канбана' (move a project task to another kanban stage). It also differentiates from the closest sibling by naming sprint_move_task for scrum tasks, so an agent can disambiguate tool purpose immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Для задач скрама используйте sprint_move_task' (use sprint_move_task for scrum tasks), which is a direct when-not/when-to-use-alternative. It also flags that the operation requires user confirmation, a key precondition for invoking the tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.